One of the few academic institutions that instills values, faith and provides valuable students to society to lead our future. I only wish I could have gone to ND, and events that i see other high academic institutions going through, ND seems to have the culture for Americans who haven’t lost their way.

On moral, by definition the judgement by any person on any action: - Here is where Harris is wrong: No matter how hard he feels something to be morally wrong (or right) and fails to imagine other humans to disagree, there are still many humans, whos moral feelings/judgements are oposite to Harris', thus prooving moral to be ultimately subjective. After all, why should anyone actually agree with Harris' personal moral? - Here is where Craig is wrong: Even if there was a god, who created this universe including all humans, having all the other things/traits Craig fabulates including a moral, still, many humans wouldnt agree with him morally, again, prooving moral to be ultimately subjective. After all, why should anyone actually agree with Craig's god's moral (which is of course Craig's personal moral)?

I'm going to be honest William Craig opted out of the whole discussion basically at the start of his first speaking part saying that hes not debating whether god exists or not hes just denating that values atlre good. Bro, obvioisly those values are good. The point is you dont need a book or a god to tell you that.

Could it be that there is an entity that created all of this, but has no preference over one organism or another.

bonehead

It's wild to compare this Harris debate vs his other one with Jordan Peterson. Craig: if there's no God, then morality is just an evolutionary adaptation that benefits us, and treating it as objective is invalid even if it benefits us. Peterson: God and religion in general may likely be just a good heuristic, and so even if it's not valid, we should treat it as objectively true because it benefits us to do so Mind blowing to think of it from that bird's eye view, but I personally have an easy resolution of the two...Peterson is full of nonsense and hot air, and Craig makes a really solid point (whether or not it truly negates Harris's argument)

Miss you

1:39:53 her question is a good one and very relevant to Sam Harris’ opinion on morality “that long before we could explain scientifically where light came from we could distinguish between light and dark & the same can be said about good and evil” - dr Craig quote. Her query “that analogy is dangerous because before we could explain light we said it came from god, could the same be said for morality & how do you explain shifts in moral consensus overtime” Morality is a science and one day we will be able to quantify it as such - Sam Harris (paraphrasing don’t quote me)

Why not speak about jewish boys,wild bill?

I see Craigs pint when it cmes t Putin. But hw ever Putin is an rthdix Cristian.

Sam failed t sayu that lgic is rt f all knwledge and tha. It is Praramund f all knwledge and its "objectivity" r nnsense,.

If the students of Notre Dame are supposed to be the smartest kids in the world, I think we're in trouble

These morons never ask where God came from

DEI is against the Catholic Church's teachings. Please defend the Trutth.

First comment great video thanks for the upload hit that like button

First comment God bless this channel

Dinesh D"Souza is incredibly intelligent and he is one of the best debaters on multiple topics; especially politics. I totally subscribe to argument for God. God bless him!

Harris is led into all sorts of "rabbit trails" without coming to solid answers on where morality originates from.

Bro this D'Souza has a wife and he's vehemently defending his intuitively false stance that a religious god is real? I would say get a life but this guy is not satisfied that his poisonous thoughts are not working.

God has arrived

How do you get a doctorate and not understand the definition of atheism? Atheists have morals independent of the lack of belief in a God. William must have missed a class in Community College in English. Show evidence of your God or shut up Craig.

What strikes me is tat you can clearly understand and follow what Harris is saying, whereas Craig sounds like confused lunatic who just wants to swarm you with words.

If I see Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, or Sam Harris, I click on it.

What are the dangers of fake news? People often make important decisions - for example, how to vote in an election or what medical treatment to follow when they’re ill - based on what they read in the news. That’s why trusted news is so important. The dangers of fake news include: When people can’t distinguish between real and fake news, it creates confusion and misunderstanding about important social and political issues. When people have a singularity based sense of "you can't believe anything you read," it undermines overall trust in legitimate news sources. Fake and misleading stories relating to medical problems- could lead to individuals making misinformed decisions about their health. A lot of fake news is designed to stir up and intensify social conflict. When different sides of an argument have their own ‘facts’, it leads to greater polarization within societies and can affect electoral outcomes. Universities and colleges expect students to use quality sources of information for assignments. Students who use sources with false or misleading information could receive lower grades. How to identify fake news You may be wondering how to identify fake news on Facebook and other social media sites? As a student, how to avoid fake news? Or how to avoid accidentally sharing misinformation online? Here are ten tips to identify misinformation, recognize fake news websites, and think before you share: 1. Check the source: Check the web address for the page you're looking at. Sometimes, fake news sites may have spelling errors in the URL or use less conventional domain extensions such as ".infonet" or ".offer". If you are unfamiliar with the site, look in the About Us section. 2. Check the author: Research them to see if they are credible - for example, are they real, do they have a good reputation, are they writing about their specific area of expertise, and do they have a particular agenda? Consider what the writer’s motivation might be. 3. Check other sources: Are other reputable news or media outlets reporting on the story? Are credible sources cited within the story? Professional global news agencies have editorial guidelines and extensive resources for fact-checking, so if they are also reporting the story, that’s a good sign. 4. Maintain a critical mindset: A lot of fake news is cleverly written to provoke strong emotional reactions such as fear or anger. Maintain a critical mindset by asking yourself - why has this story been written? Is it promoting a particular cause or agenda? Is it trying to make me click through to another website? 5. Check the facts: Credible news stories will include plenty of facts - data, statistics, quotes from experts, and so on. If these are missing, question why. Reports with false information often contain incorrect dates or altered timelines, so it’s a good idea to check when the article was published. Is it a current or old news story? 6. Check the comments: Even if the article or video is legitimate, the comments below may not be. Often links or comments posted in response to content can be autogenerated by bots or people hired to put our misleading or confusing information. 7. Check your own biases: We all have biases - could these be influencing the way you respond to the article? Social media can create echo chambers by suggesting stories that match your existing browsing habits, interests, and opinions. The more we read from diverse sources and perspectives, the more likely it is that we can draw accurate conclusions. 8. Check whether it’s a joke: Satirical websites are popular, and sometimes it is not always clear whether a story is just a joke or parody. Check the website to see if it’s known for satire or creating funny stories. 9. Check images are authentic: Images you see on social media could have been edited or manipulated. Possible signs include warping - where straight lines in the background now appear wavy - as well as strange shadows, jagged edges, or skin tone that looks too perfect. Bear in mind, too, that an image may be accurate but simply used in a misleading context. You can use tools such as Google’s Reverse Image Search to check where an image originates from and whether it has been altered. 10. Use a fact-checking site: Some of the best known include: Snopes PolitiFact Fact Check BBC Reality Check Fake news relies on believers reposting, retweeting, or otherwise sharing false information. If you're not sure whether an article is authentic or not, pause and think before you share. To help stay safe online, use an antivirus solution like Kaspersky Total Security, which protects you from hackers, viruses, malware, and other online threats.

Eh not a great translation of the idea. It's literally "leave the way" so it's nothing particularly Irish

1:06:39 - 1:07:18 basicly thats explain everything

Am I the only one who thinks that moral values come from the fact that what we don't want to be done to ourselves, we generally don't want to do unto others? I don't want to be bre mutilated, therefore, I don't want to mutilate others. Maybe I'm missing something, but I really feel it's as simple as that.

I am here for hitchens voice I continue to listen to his debates

Religion should be BANNED! It's the root cause of so much human suffering by arrogant peoples who believe their way is RIGHT!

What I've come to understand is that there is little success to this kind of intention (doesn't mean he shouldn't do that). Sam's reasoning is clear and precise, his examples are blatantly obvious. The fact is that these arguments don't matter much. As St. Augustine put it: crede ut intellegas. That is to say that faith must come first in order to understand. People by the billions are in a position in which common sense has little to no value in such matters. Humankind can go on for thousands of years, yet religion will remain. What a powerful set of ideas!

No clash and Harris avoided the topic.

(Apr 30, 2024) 30:52 35:00 Afghanistan39:52 God created water44:30 Sam Harris58:38 9M children die59:28 Pagans are going to hell1:01:00 God is so good to me, dont u know?1:04:13 1:17:48 Yogis1:23:49 _____ William L Craig46:36 47:29 _______\\\_______ opening speech (20 min) 7:53 William Lane Craig 27:42 Sam Harris rebuttal (12 min) 46:36 William Lane Craig 58:38 Sam Harris rebuttal no. 2 (8 min) 1:10:26 William Lane Craig 1:17:48 Sam Harris closing speech (5 min) 1:25:58 William Lane Craig 1:31:10 Sam Harris questions 1:37:11

D'Souza is not in the same league, nice try though

Dr. Craig= word salad

Unfortunately, Craig’s reasoning doesn’t make sense due to the continued insistence of the evidence of God, which he refuses to debate. Also, it’s interesting that bad can be good and good can be bad as long as the great almighty, unquestionable god has seemed it good and part of his will. 😂

Christian’s are largely hypocritical as such not exactly moral. Also, how can you not argue the existence of God and insist that isn’t the topic while insisting that God is the moral authority. He’s also not defending the Bible but continues to espouse that God and biblical principles which one must believe in to support the foundation of his argument. This is an argument full of fallacies and circular reasoning. By stating this is not a debate about the existence of God or the defense of the Bible negates all other points he attempts to make because he insist that the Hebrew God does exist. Make it make sense.

Which God is the authority? Craig keeps stating this is not about religion, but he keeps focusing on God being an absolute authority on morality. You can’t state such a fact without including an argument for religion. There are many religions who believe in God. Many atrocities and harmful behavior has been perpetuated by religion, and those gods, which people claim they serve.

Yes, because all policeman are moral. 🙄There are many Christians who are not moral and there are many atheist who are. Morality is not based on religion because many wars and deaths have occurred in the name of religion or God. Morality is simply being a good person and being loving and kind to other people that does not require the authority to tell me to do that that is my conscience and the way that we need to live if we have empathy for other people, regardless of their being immoral authority. Geez, the length to which Christians go to word salad, explain their delusions absurd. I understand these beliefs. Bring you comfort because I was there one at one point, but I no longer Believe such ridiculous, fairytales, and explanations.

Survival in a society tells us what is acceptable. Humans are obviously held to high standards than animals. The lengths of delusion you guys go to to cling to your faith and comfort. I’ve been there but once you see it, you can’t unsee it.

Subjective morality is delusional because it is always changing by matter of opinion. Harris says that being healthy is good but cannot demonstrate that life is good. How can being healthy be a good thing if being alive is not inherently a good thing? If being alive is a good thing then the belief that you will die permanently is inherently a bad thing, which is all atheism offers at the end of the day. All atheism offers at the end of the day is utter annihilation of all life and consciousness. How can Harris claim to view morality as the flourishing of conscience animals in one hand, while simultaneously claiming that these animals will be extinct and annihilated in the near future according to the cosmological timeline on the other hand? Harris’ worldview as an ethical landscape falls apart when you consider the ultimate fate of all sentient life within the atheistic worldview!

And will be so forever. Until someone tells the world what god is ! And that would be a miracle !

The neverending chatter about god. It goes ranting on n on, to no end.

I can’t find part one of this debate? Where is it?

Hitchens isn’t an atheist anymore.

Go Irish

Religion, fast talking snake oil sales for the slowest of thinkers , mostly Republicans these days

Not only is Christianity a religion of human sacrifice but they practice a ritual of cannibalism... You know the Lord's supper where they eat the cracker (flesh of Christ) and the wine (blood of Christ). 🤮

We must continue to question the belief that we need to worship. It will take a lot to convince those that find comfort in living a servile life. Whilst there are people committing heinous crimes in 'God's' name, we can't take this lightly. I believe that continuing the breakdown of broad-based Christianity will lead to the undoing of the more potent religions. There is a lot of work to do to free the victims of religion!

Grown men believing that a man walked on the water is ludicrous. Its embarrassing.

Admittedly I am a "young earther". I have a degree in Biology and took a class in Evolution were I got an A, although I have never believed in Evolution myself. Since I have watching this topic from both sides. In addition, I, admittedly, am not a learned as Hitchens and most likely Hitchens knows way more on a lot of stuff, he doesn't know what he talking about. The thought of Macro Evolution is infantile because while Darwin described micro evolution he was not describing Macro. Friends who believe in Macro I pray that your name is written in "Lambs Book of Life" and that you will come to saving knowledge of Him such you will bow before Creator